Hi, everyone. And welcome back to one of your favorite segments, certainly one of the most cultured and sophisticated segments【詞源考古研究所】, in English, we call it 【It Means What?】

Hi, 安瀾.

Hi, Lulu, hi, everyone.

So in this segment, we are going to get to the bottom of a lot of the words, phrases or even idioms, and explore their origin, their etymology.

Yes. And today we got a really interesting one for you.

They're all interesting.

We're gonna be talking about Machiavellian.

Wow, sounds really sophisticated. I've heard people talking about it, usually they're trying to be pretentious.

Well yes.

就還挺裝的這個詞.

So Machiavellian is quite an interesting term because it's a word that is named after a person.

中文就是叫馬基雅維利式的.

Yes.

So obviously that's after someone called Machiavelli.

Yes. It's named after Niccolò Machiavelli, who was anItalian Renaissance political philosopher and diplomat.

He famously wrote the book called, I don't know the English translation of it, the Chinese name is called 《君主論》.

It's called The Prince.

Oh, The Prince.

Or Il?Principe in Italian.

Yeah, I know you're gonna be pretentious.

Well, that's why people listen to this segment. Mhm. So this book is really, really famous because it offers advice on how rulers can gain and more importantly, maintain power.

Rulers. Now we don't call them rulers anymore. They're government. People were governing people, yes, but in the past with kings, emperors, they are rulers or they were rulers就是統治者. yes, And how to rule a country, a kingdom, an empire.

Absolutely. So It's important to remember at this time, Italy wasn't actually a country, it was an area.

So each city had its own government, some were republics, some had their kings, some had dukes, some had princes. So the Italy that we think of nowadays is actually a very very new idea.

The true unification of what we now know as Italy came much later.

In the 19th century. But before then, it was just very, very small states all fighting with each other. So some states would become very powerful when the other states would decline and it'll just go round , round ,round and round in circles.

That's why I guess these different rulers they really needed like a manual as in how to control their kingdom, how to rule their kingdom. They are not kingdom but you know their land, their people.

Yeah, and this is why the book is famous because it offers pragmatic and ruthless suggestions about how to maintain power. And the basic idea is that "the ends justify the means."(如果結果或目標是正當的或有價值的，那么使用的方法或手段即使可能存在爭議或道德上的模糊，也是可以接受的。這是一種實用主義的觀點，強調結果的重要性。)

The ends justify the means. We often say this is a means to an end, yes, means refers to how you do it手段and ends is the result, yes, the final goal. So “the ends justify the means” basically means as long as you can achieve your goal, do whatever you want.

Or whatever it takes.

Or whatever it takes. 就是你只要為了為達目的不擇手段,中文會這么說, yes, you don't choose which means. So when people say Machiavellian, does that sound negative in English?

Very negative .

Oh.

Because it describes someone who is cunning who likes to manipulate other people and is willing to lie or exploit others to achieve their goals. So you can use it in politics, but you can also use it in business as well.

For example, my boss is really Machiavellian?

You can.

I think I'm giving the boss too much credit .

Or you can just basically say anyone can be Machiavellian. It's about using whatever it takes to get what you want.

So 安瀾you mentioned, Machiavellian is being pragmatic, pragmatic in itself is not a negative word. It just means functional, yeah, realistic functional.

It means realistic, it means functional. But what makes Machiavellian so controversial is that there's no morality in it.

Oh yeah, I think that's what makes it really negative. Pragmatic, like I often... I would often refer to myself as a pragmatist就實用主義者, in itself it’s neutral, it’s not good or bad. But if you believe that the ends justify the means, then you can abandon all moral principles, yeah, and then just trying to achieve your pragmatic goals.

Yes.

That's where it turns negative.

Exactly, because in The Prince, there's nothing about god or there's nothing about religion, there's nothing about morality, it's all about power. You want power, this is how you get it.

中國歷史上有很多種權謀之術, and some of those were also very very dark, very manipulative.

Exactly.

現在我們就是PUA,就是操控術, 權力操控術. I bet it was very popular the book.

It was very, very popular and it's still read nowadays.

I've read it somewhere that people, especially for a long period of time, every ruler in the western world, every ruler basically read that book at some point.

Yes. Now there is a little bit of a debate on whether or not Machiavelli truly believed in what he was writing or was he trying to satirize? Was he trying to exaggerate?

OKAY.

But to be honest, I would say Machiavelli lived in the time, which was incredibly dangerous. And I dare say that it's probably what he actually believe.

...what he actually believed in.

Yeah,

Yeah, I think if he wrote an entire book filled with how to manipulate people, it would be a pretty big effort if he's really trying to use that entire book to satirize.

Yes, but I'll tell you what, rather than us tell you this is what he meant, this was a type of person he was, let's have a look at some quotes.

Oh yes, exactly. I have a couple as well.

Yeah, and you can all judge for yourself.

“Since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved”

Oh yeah, I know this one. In fact, I think a lot of the Chinese emperors also ruled in this way, 所以就說你可以成為眾人愛戴的君主統治者, 你也可以成為眾人恐懼的君主.

But because these two cannot coexist or often cannot coexist, if you must choose is better to be feared than to be loved, yes, it's much easier to be feared than to be loved as well.

Absolutely. And He also said

“…he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.”

He who... “deceive” means “lying”, yes, “lying” or “cheat”, will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived. In today's business, it's really like只要你想割韭菜, 總有韭菜愿意被你割.

Exactly. That is what he meant.

That is dark. So there's absolutely no morality, no wonder he famously said things like

“Of mankind we may say in general they are fickle, hypocritical, and greedy of gain.”

Yes, he sees the darkness in humanity.

Exactly.

So fickle means constantly changing their mind. Mhm. Hypocritical,fake, you're doing things or you say things that you don't agree with.很虛偽; and greedy of gain, they always want more.

Exactly, and his book is or his theories are all about exploiting sort of the weakness of humanity.

Exactly.

So nowadays, when in English, like honestly speaking, if you're talking with someone, if someone refers to something as oh this is so Machiavellian, honestly, 安瀾, how would that make you feel it.

It is rather pretentious. But it is something that is often said, particularly in terms of politics, in terms of society. So it's not something we would say every day. But it's something that you will see written or you will hear refer to.

And final question, bringing it back to us, like personally, do you believe in Machiavellian theories in your day to day dealings with people?

I don't like to adopt them. I’d like to think I have some degree of personal morality. But the thing is he does mention a lot, which I think is true, particularly about people in general.

And this is something that I have seen that you have individuals who are very clever. they're very careful, et cetera. But when you have a group of people together, that's when things get a bit dangerous.

The whole mob mentality thing.

Exactly. And I think there he has a very, very good point.

Like the maddening crowd.

Exactly. And what about you?

Well,I would say sometimes I might lean dangerously towards that.

Okay,

So I do often see the darkness of humanity and I do understand the power of manipulation. But more as in how can I guard myself against that? So even if I feel like I can totally manipulate someone, I would try not to just for my own personal benefit.

Exactly. And that is very anti Machiavellian.

Yeah, but I am a pragmatist.

Well yeah, but as you say, there's nothing wrong with being a pragmatist. It's just how far does that pragmatism go.

Exactly, very deep segment today.

Very very deep and also very sophisticated as well.

Exactly. 今天非常有文化的議題, so leave us comment in the comment section, what do you think about Machiavellian theories and also anything to add on the topic.

Or if you want to put in the request on what other phrases or words or idioms that you want us to talk about in this segment, leave us a comment. Thank you, 安瀾for coming to the show.

Thanks, Lulu, thanks everyone.

We'll see you next time.

Bye.